LexPAN NAYAR versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 367 ... PAN NAYAR A ~ v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE (Criminal Appeal Nos. 829 of 2008) AUGUST 17, 2009 B [V.S. SIRPURKAR AND DEEPAK VERMA, JJ.] -r Penal Code, 1860 - ss 302 and 392 rlw s. 397 - Murder of a lady and theft of gold ornaments worn by her - FIR allf!ging pair of ear studs and gold chain missing - Arrest of c accused with ornaments after 12 days from the dispensary of PW 7-doctor - Evidence of brother of deceased who saw accused following the deceased on the date of incident, • recovery of ornaments worn by deceased from accused as also recovery of blood stained cloth of accused and non- D -t explanation by accused of the injuries suffered by him - Conviction and sentence ulss 302 and 392 rlw s.397 on basis of circumstantial evidence by courts below - Sustainability of - Held: Not sustainable - There was delay in recording statement of brother of deceased as also evidence was E inconsistent - Prosecution case as regard recovery of ornaments from accused cannot be believed - Husband ... failed to establish that the said ornaments belonged to I deceased - Recovery of weapons and blood stained jacket + of accused also cannot be believed - Trial court erred in F allowing new facts to be introduced by re-examination- Motive of robbery not present as accused was known to family members of deceased - Thus, order of courts below set aside. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal G Nos. 829 of 2008. Jr From the Judgment and Order dated 20.02.2006 of the , H\gh Court of Madras at Madurai Bench in Criminal Appeal No . 299 of 1997. 367 H A B 368 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2009] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. S. Mahendran for the Appellant. V. Kanagaraj, Tamim Hashimi, Promila (for S. Thananjayan) for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by V.S. SIRPURKAR, J. 1. Appellant herein challenges his conviction for the offence under Sections 302 and 392 read with Section 397 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called "IPC" for ·"r short) by the Trial Court and its confirmation by the Appellate c Court. The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows. 2. The Appellant Pannayar was charged with the aforementioned offences on the allegation that on the night between 18.1.1995 and 19.1.1995, he committed the murder 0 of one Thilagavalli (deceased) and also committed theft of the gold ornament~ worn by her. The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and relied on 22 documents and also pointed out the 15 material objects. Thilagavalli was married to Subbiah Naicker (PW-1). She was a working woman in the mid-day meal scheme. They used to live in Village E Keelamarikadu in Tamil Nadu. On the fateful day, she told her husband at about 8.30 p.m. that she would be going out for attending the nature's call towards south side of the Village. The prose_cution alleged that normally, the villagers went near the pond called Kanmai (local tank). When she did not return till 9'0 F clock, he (Subbiah) started her search alongwith his son. However, they did not go till the end of Kanmai. They made the search throughout the night, but to no effect. In the morning, one Ponnuthai, who had gone to attend the caH of nature, informed the son of the deceased that Thilagavalli was lying on the west G side of Kanmai. Therefore, they went there at about 6.30 a.m. H · only to find that Thilagavalli was lying dead there. She was no more and had suffered injuries on her head, forehead, as also on the left side of the mouth. She did not have on her body, the ornaments, namely, gold chain weighing three sovereign, her PANNAYAR v. STATE OF TAMIL NADU BY 369 INSPECTOR OF POLICE [V.S. SIRPURKAR, J.) ~ bowl type thali and also the ear studs, worth about Rs.10,000/ A - to Rs.12,000/-. Subbiah (PW-1), therefore, contacted one Raja, the Village Administrative Officer of his village and ===* lodged a complaint with him. Both of them then went and lodged a report in the Police Station almost immediately. In that, he narrated the whole story including the details of the lost B ornaments. He referred to a "pair of ear studs" as missing. On ' the basis of this, investigation started. The body was sent for \ "> post-mortem, wherein it was established that the deceased had -f suffered anti-mortem injuries. On the next day, her funeral took ( place in the same village, which was allegedly attended by the c I accused
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.